Final answer:
It is true that forensic pathologists usually hesitate to draw conclusions on sexual assault without obvious signs, due to possible inaccuracies from gross observations. They carefully differentiate between findings from forensic anthropology and pathology to make informed decisions on cause and manner of death.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that unless obvious signs of sexual assault are present, most forensic pathologists will hesitate to reach conclusions based on gross, observed, findings during a post-mortem sexual assault exam is TRUE. Forensic pathologists are mindful of the fact that gross observations can be misleading without corroborating evidence or without the clear signs that are indicative of a sexual assault. Additionally, there is often a distinction between the roles of forensic pathologists and forensic anthropologists. While forensic anthropologists provide valuable information such as estimating the age, sex, and stature of the deceased, it is the forensic pathologist who ultimately determines the manner and cause of death, which may include assessments related to sexual assault. This determination is often based on combined data, including tissue analysis, toxicological reports, and a comprehensive review of all available evidence.